Match.com said it will begin checking users against the national sex offender registry, days after a class action lawsuit was filed by a woman allegedly sexually assaulted by a man she met on the dating site.
The decision came after years of considering the move but deciding against it because of the unreliability of the screening method, Match.com President Mandy Ginsberg said in a statement released late Sunday.
“In recent conversations with providers … over the last few days, we’ve been advised that a combination of improved technology and an improved database now enables a sufficient degree of accuracy to move forward with this initiative, despite its continued imperfection,” she said.
The announcement came after a Hollywood executive, identified only as Jane Doe, called for the site to change its policies in a lawsuit filed last week in Los Angeles County Superior Court. In the suit, the woman alleges she was sexually assaulted by another Match.com member, Alan Paul Wurtzel, who had been convicted six times for sexual battery, according to a statement issued by her attorney, Mark Webb.
According to the class action lawsuit, the woman met Wurtzel through Match.com in 2010, and the two set up a meeting, after which he raped her. Related felony charges are pending, according to court documents.
Among other things, the civil suit seeks an injunction prohibiting Match.com, based in Dallas and owned by New York-based IAC, from signing up further members until the screening of members is implemented.
Webb did not immediately respond to a phone message seeking further comment.
Match.com spokesman Matthew Traub said the company was already considering a plan to screen users against the sex offender registry when the lawsuit was filed, though the attention brought by the suit expedited the decision.
The site said it expects to implement the screening in 60 to 90 days. It also noted that it currently offers safety tips to its users for offline meetings.
Before you get into any relationship with someone you meet on the internet pay the $50 to have a background check done. I found out that an internet romeo had a DUI on his record. Is that really the kind of person you would want to get involved with?
It’s questionable this will work. After all, an individual could use a bogus name to avoid being screened.
i found out that my internet romeo had a dui as well…it was a legitimate mistake that you can’t rush to judgement on
Geez, DUIs are impermissable? Really? Do you know that if a woman who weighs 120 lbs. has two glasses of wine in a restaurant with a meal that she’s considered “impaired” according to the state of Illinois?
the need to screen it for fake profiles first and then worry about that.
I encountered some bimbo who spends all her waking hours on the internet and goes by the bimbo name, Blondie. Thank you background search service for steering me clear of this monster.
Are there guarantees with Match.com? How is this THEIR fault? If they are accountable then I suppose Match.com should get more money from members who have successful dates.
Thank you Match. com, I was getting tired of hooking up women only to find that they were engaged in the child sex slave trade. Sure, they always had some bogus story why these poor children live with them like “she’s my daughter” or “he’s my son” or some such nefarious lie.
A great reason not to give Match.com the business they confidently believe such scrutiny will generate. The guys, or possibly a few girls, did their time. Time to move on. All of us. Individually and collectively. Some nut politician wants to create registry of domestic abuse convicts. What next?
Second, and I am no lawyer, but if I suspect Match would carry some sort of liability in the event their “screening” fails to catch a so-called predator and he acts a second time.
Isn’t the date itself a screening process?
All you have to do to get around the site is to use an address and credit card of someone else. That’s how they check. It’s just a corproate waste of money, done in response to a ridiculous complaint, and Match.com wants to calm the public.
I was a member of Match. They have freaks, sex addicts, fake profiles and disease. I’d take the molester over what they dont screen for.
Excuse me for not wanting someone who drives drunk to be around me or my son. It is beyond irresponsible. And it is a deal breaker for many reasonable people.
only losers use that anyways, the internet is for hookups not real dates, get a clue
all guys on match are liars and creeps
And they just thought of this NOW?!
How about taking some responsibility for policing your own actions? If you’re going to try online sites, do your own research. Next they will want the local bars to screen for sex offenders in case someone meets a guy at the bar and goes out with him? Ridiculous.
I wish they had done this 8 years ago before I met my wife and had a kid, LOL. Just kidding, I know that this medium, like craigslist and others, is full of liars and scammers now. Too bad for the people looking for an alternative.
I was lucky and thank you know who
Will they also screen for gold diggers and man eaters?
It’s actually a smart move from a corporate perspective. Will enhance Match’s reputation as a place to meet quality people, regardless of whether it will really work or not. I do disagree with lawsuit though; this woman could have met the man at the grocery store, had 10 dates in public before becoming intimate and finding out he was a sex offender. Shocking…people you date covering up their past…that NEVER happens anywhere else.